Playoffs? Don't talk about, playoffs? You kiddin' me?

Discussion in 'NCAA (All Sports)' started by AJ_II, Dec 8, 2008.

?

BCS or Playoffs?

  1. BCS

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Playoffs

    10 vote(s)
    100.0%
  1. AJ_II

    AJ_II Well-Known Member

    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDjG9XlsHqQ&NR=1[/ame]


    Sorry, Jim, it might be a waste of energy, but I'm talking playoffs.

    This year, I don't think anyone can argue that both Oklahoma and Florida belong in the title game. However, there are plenty of teams that have legitimate complaints, especially Texas...but Penn State, 'Bama, USC, Texas Tech, even Utah or Boise State...they all have strong cases to be in that game too.

    So, that brings me to, yes, the playoffs. Do you like the BCS formatted postseason as it is currently configured, or would you rather see the NCAA move to a playoff? I know it's futile in bringing it up since the BCS is here to stay until at least 2014, but it's fun to play "what-if" games.

    Here's how I'd setup the playoffs, if I were running things...

    First, keep the current BCS ranking system, or something similar to it. At the end of the season, you take your top 8 teams and seed them accordingly. Now, I'll make a provision and say that ANY and ALL undefeated teams should be and have to be invited to the playoff, even if they are ranked outside of the top 8. For example, if you have a team like Ball State or Boise State run the table but finish outside the top 8, they would automatically be invited to the playoff. This would consequently bump a team who was ranked in the top 8 - like a Penn State, or maybe even my Red Raiders - out of the playoff. Is Boise State an elite team on a national level? No, I think everyone can agree on that. BUT, you go undefeated, you should earn the opportunity, in my opinion.

    Second, you can keep your current BCS Bowls (Orange, Sugar, Rose, Fiesta), and use these sites as your first-round locations. All the other non-BCS bowls can continue to operate as usual, consisting of all bowl eligible teams not in the playoff. For the semifinals and finals of the playoff, you move the location to a pre-determined site which rotates each year. You can keep it like it is now with the BCS Title Game.

    So, using the final BCS rankings, here's how they'd be bracketed (Penn State would be bumped for Boise State, even though Penn State is number 8).

    (1) Oklahoma vs. (8) Boise State
    (4) Alabama vs. (5) USC

    (3) Texas vs. (6) Utah
    (2) Florida vs. (7) Texas Tech


    Just for fun, let's apply this format to years prior, starting with last season when there was so much controversy to end the season. Kansas would have been bumped for Hawaii.

    (1) Ohio State vs. (8) Hawaii
    (4) Oklahoma vs. (5) Georgia

    (3) Virgina Tech vs. (6) Missouri
    (2) LSU vs. (7) USC


    And for one more example, let's see how 2004 would have looked when you had three undefeated BCS teams and Auburn was left out...

    (1)USC vs. (8) Boise State
    (4) Texas vs. (5) California

    (3) Auburn vs. (6) Utah
    (2) Oklahoma vs. (7) Georgia
     
  2. Aaron

    Aaron Moderator

    I agree with you on everything, except for the part about including all undefeated teams outside of the BCS conferences. I would just include the highest ranked one.
     
  3. Bark

    Bark Hey Now!

    I think the playoffs should include 16 teams. Eight is too few, and 32 is too many. Invite all conference champions (screw the independents, sorry Army, Navy, and Western Kentucky), and the remaining 5 teams with the best record. Seed them according to their record, and have the tournament.

    Unfortunately, too many people make money with the current system, I doubt they'll ever change it.
     
  4. MAJ Badmotherfarker

    MAJ Badmotherfarker is drinking a beer.

    The BCS is a joke. I can't believe it's still even around.
     

Share This Page